Usually that would be true, but not always. There have certainly been cases where players named on the ground have been the player missing from the eventual 22 - often it's injury, but sometimes just the fit.

"I like to pay taxes. With them I buy civilisation" - Oliver Wendell HolmesAlternative facts, alternative facts, pants on fire....

Interesting that Simmo has come out and said our inside 50 numbers are well down over the last few weeks, as well as time inside F50, but our work at the contest is significantly improved. That's not exactly new, but it got me wondering if the Mutimer - Cripps swap has been responsible?

Mutimer is a bigger body than Cripps, and certainly appears more comfortable at the contest. Whereas Cripps' forward pressure would be at the top end of the league, but he's probably not a strong mid. The stronger midfield has helped the back half and so we are back to marking these sky-balls.

Interesting thought anyway, and hopefully shows us that we can play a extra mid, but will lose some forward pressure. Would be useful against teams that are weak in the backhalf but have strong mids (geelong for example)

Peter_Melesso_Fanclub wrote:Interesting indeed. I thought Josh had done enough to keep his place tbh, so I'm a little surprised by this. But pleased with the faith being shown in Mutimer.

After a pretty good match against the Muppets he has been pretty quiet. Over 2 matches he has had 21 possessions and only 4 tackles and 2 goals. I think the recent lack of forward pressure has been raised by Simmo, so this could be the result.

Given the evenness of the competition leading to plenty of upsets every weekend it is hard to feel confident about any game this season.I have been enjoying watching some of the other team play this season. I admit to turning off the game after the Hawks got out to 6 goals to 1 against the pies though, but the fact they then lost that game and that the Giants got over the Tigers in the last minute also shows that many teams can score quickly and reduce large deficits if they get a run on.For us to win a good start is always a bonus and to paraphrase the coach....consistency of intent, or in other words a genuine four quarter effort.We have a strong team but the bombers also have some strengths - a much better ruckman than our two part timers and a lot more pace around the ground. But I still think we should win this game.

Itâ€™s been great footy to watch the last couple of weeks. It seems that when winning that no lead is too great or when behind then no deficit canâ€™t be overhauled. Never relax and never give up. Though I do like the way we play congestion footy on a narrow ground so as long as we can find a way to kick a worthy score I fancy our chances at defending it.

Regarding this being a danger game; we simply need to win every game we possibly can with there being so many teams back in the pack; we donâ€™t want to become one of them and if we drop one game we will be. Besides we play the evil foe, the team all Eagles supporters should dislike â€“ hate with a passion â€“ above all others. No redeeming features as a club; staff, supporters or players. Plus a bunch of scumbag performance enhancing drug cheaters who still think they did nothing wrong! I have not forgotten all their evil rotten past; a must win game for the sake of pride alone.